so if the observable universe spans 100 billion light years from side to side.
How is it then possible to be only 15 billion years old?
Clearly hydrogen does not move faster than the speed of light.
space can move faster than light
>>8003427
good point.
>>8003441
i tried to find a way this makes sense but i couldnt find it.
even in a uniform expansion of everything (stellar) the speedlimit is violated.
>>8003427
Standard balloon analogy. Imagine a balloon expanding, plus the rule that any ant on the balloon is not allowed to exceed a certain speed, as measured according to a frame that is "at rest" relative to the bit of balloon below the ant. However, two bits of balloon, if they're far enough away from each other, can be moving apart faster than the ant's speed limit.
Obviously, in the real world, there is no balloon, and this is just a metaphor designed to aid comprehension.
>>8003468
Space doesn't "move", it expands. The sped limit is not violated, there is simply more and more space for stuff to move through to causally affect anything.
>>8003507
How can something not move if it's expanding then pal
>>8003507
i think im getting it now. halfway
but doesnt this mean that there is a lenght which must be exceed to allow this kind of movement.
as other guy wrote
>...far enough away from each other...
>>8003515
Simple. If you just sit in your chair eating doritos for 5 years, you will not "move", but you'll be getting fatter and fatter and the sweat will take longer to drip from your mantits onto the ground.
>>8003477
but if space is expanding, how is it possible that space does not have an effect on the elements inside it.
and yet be able to push thees elements at over 6 times the speed of light, without any effects on the elements.
How is that logical?
>>8003477
if our star is being "pushed" expanded away from a different object in space at over 6 times the speed of light.
How is it then possible for us to see that light?
>>8003559
It's only expanding in its most empty regions. For now. If the trend holds, the big rip will happen and things will be affected in a much more direct way, including chemical and atomic bonds. Basically every single gluon, quark and everything else will fly apart once the expansion hits a certain point.
>>8003532
So your skin won't move? Kek, stupid analogy kid.
>>8003592
It's meant for stupid people. Skin is space in that context, and will only "move" in so far as some regions of space expand slower than the rest.
>>8003570
so if we are moving away from a galaxy, and that galaxy is moving away from us, at over 6 times the speed of light.
how are we able to observe that light now.
if both are moving away from each other. it would be impossible to observe that light.
>>8003609
They were closer at some point, and moving slower away from each other. Photons from way back when would have -almost- reached us, and because of the inflation of space would've taken longer to reach us, get redshifted and give us clues as to the actual distance between the galaxies.
The circumference is equal to the rate at which space is expanding minus the rate at which matter is converting to denser dark matter, which slows down the expansion via gravity. This was my thesis. Speed equilibrium isn't broken because nothing has a mass per se during this process. Think of a pond. You drop a stone (big bang) and there are ripples outward. The pond outside of the outermost ripple has a state of 0 until the ripple hits it and the process begins.
Holy shit, so many fucking stupid shitcunts.
>If something can't be explained by a simple analogy my retarded fucktard of a brain can understand, it can't possibly be correct.
Literally everything you think you "know" about complicated matters like GR and QM are abstractions designed to convey SOME of the extremely complex ACTUAL science. It's wrong, and if you want to be less wrong you have to study physics.
>>8003427
guys, what the fuck: spacetime is a differntiable manifold. it has a metric everywhere. this metric has (+,+,+,-) signature. this defines a tangent lightcone at every point. nothing can move faster than light means worldlines of particles must have tangent vectors always inside the lightcone. how the fuck does this conflict with the fact that the size of a space-like slice (the universe at a given instant) grows with time faster than light could cover in that time?
you guys have to stop reading "the physics of star trek" and take a simple course in general relativity. knowing vaguely some slogans does not mean you know relativity.
>>8004115
>>guys, what the fuck: spacetime is a differntiable manifold.
in what model?
>>8004117
man, in general relativity. what are we speaking of?
>>8003609
http://youtu.be/zO2vfYNaIbk
>>8004120
you can define spacetime as some set of events, and then in the particular case of GR, it turns out that the spacetimes have the structure of what you said.
>>8003609
Are you just pretending to be retarded?
But if the balloon is space what is the space between the balloon?
>>8003592
>Kek
Does this come from WoW or Joyce or did Wow get it from joyce?
>>8004237
The surface of the balloon is 3d space. Ignore the interior of the balloon or consider it the 4th dimension of space.
>>8003609
If the observable universe has a diameter of 100 billion lightyers, its radius is 50 billion light years, which is 10/3 times the speed a light, not 6 times the speed of light, assuming that the big bang happened at one single point.
This is why i think you are ignorant and why im not taking you seriously.
>>8004475
It's a set of events, a metric that lets you ask how far away two points are, and technically an affine connection but that doesn't change so it doesn't come up.
In spacetime expansion, the metric just gets uniformly bigger, so the distances between all points increase. On the small scale (smaller than galaxies), this apparent repulsive force is very small and is simply overcome entirely by the forces normally holding shit together; but when you add up all the space between galaxies that combined expansion is quite large while the gravitational attraction is negligible.
>>8004664
yes yes, i know, but i had the impression you were arguing against the differentiable structure. metric and connection need it, of course. i guess we are saying the same thing.
>>8004664
>distances between all points increase
2 cm/s per ly
>>8003427
>file name
>virgo super cluster
I get it.
>>8004256
Let me rephrase.
The common analogy compares the surface of the balloon to space.
When a balloon expands, each atom of rubber becomes stretched. The surface is now less dense. I.e. there is more space between each atom of the balloon.
When space 'expands' something still must fill the space.
All I'm saying is it doesn't make sense.
Because things began at one place and spread out in a mostly uniform direction every way at close to light speed. If everything is moving relative to each other, then everything has had a lot more time to reach 100 billion light years in length.
Or, time travelling photons. I don't know. But. If so... Wow. Time travelling photons from galaxies in the future!
Why is the milkyway in the center?
We weren't the center of the big bang, were we?
>>8005584
>When space 'expands' something still must fill the space.
You don't understand what an analogy is. If I said airplanes are like birds do you ask where the plane's reproductive organs are?
>>8005601
wayy faster than c
if the observable universe expanded from a proton size to an orange size in 1e-35, that's more than 10000c
>>8005611
Why am I in the middle of the edges of the horizon when I'm in a boat in the middle of the pacific ocean?
Because there is more ocean.
Here's an interesting thought.
Maybe the Big Bang didn't happen in one fucking point in space.
woah
>>8005625
idk dude, my intuition i saying that we are the center of the universe.
>>8005628
You're wrong about the big bang.
>>8005626
> implying points exist in reality
topkek
>>8005631
https://youtu.be/7ImvlS8PLIo?t=10m
>>8003427
nice image name
>>8005635
No, I'm not.
If everything is moving away from one another and has been so for 15 billion years, it'd explain why we have 100 billion light years of observable universe especially if particles travelling in opposite directions at light speed have unforseen relativistic effects.
I know 15 plus 15 is 30, but I'm sure the reasoning works out. Maybe the universe itself did expand faster than the speed of light, who knows.
>>8005649
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html
Get fucking rekt, bitch
>>8003516
Think of two dots on a balloon, as the balloon expands, the distance between the dots increases without the dots themselves actually moving.
